Department of Philosophy and Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana 46556, USA.
Account Res. 2012;19(4):220-42. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2012.700882.
Special-interest polluters often file research-misconduct (RM) charges against scientists whose research suggests needed pollutant regulation. This article argues that U.S. RM regulations are flawed in requiring RM assessors/experts/accused, but not accusers, to reveal possible conflicts of interest (COI) that could affect RM allegations. It (1) summarizes U.S. RM regulatory history; (2) uses a case study about 2011 RM allegations, filed by chemical-industry-funded toxicologist Edward Calabrese, to illustrate problems with RM regulations; and (3) offers 4 arguments in favor of revising RM regulations so as to require RM-accuser revelation of possible COI and who funded preparation of the RM allegations.
利益集团污染者经常对那些研究表明需要污染管制的科学家提出研究不当（RM）指控。本文认为，美国 RM 法规存在缺陷，它要求 RM 评估员/专家/被告，但不要求指控者披露可能影响 RM 指控的利益冲突（COI）。本文（1）总结了美国 RM 监管历史；（2）使用了一个关于 2011 年 RM 指控的案例研究，这些指控是由化学工业资助的毒理学家爱德华·卡拉布雷塞提出的，以说明 RM 法规存在的问题；（3）提出了 4 个论点，赞成修改 RM 法规，以便要求 RM 指控者披露可能的 COI 以及谁资助了 RM 指控的准备工作。
